should the state be allowed to charge a child as an adult...

pk · 11-22-2006, 03:38 PM

Should the state be allowed to charge a child as young as 10 as an adult for homicide related crimes?

A news story just broke in our city about a 12 year old girl attacking another 12 year old girl over a boy. The first 12 year old stabbed the second girl with a hair pick which then lodged into the heart of the victim.

To read the full story: Kenosha Co. 7th Grader Stabs Classmate In Heart
click here: http://wfrv.com/topstories/local_story_326165053.html

I was wondering what others think about the fact that a 12 year old in an immature fight about a boy could now stand trial as an adult and face the rest of her childhood and most of her young adult years behind bars with hardened criminals? (after she is 18 she would go to adult prison).

This is a horrible act against another child and if it were to happen against my child I would want action taken against the one that did harm.

But on the other hand this is a 12 year old that did the crime. Did she do this with a full mature knowledge that her actions would cause her to lose her freedom for most of her adult life?

What does everyone feel on this subject? Should the state be able to sentence children in random violent acts as a grown up adult would be sentence? Or should new laws protecting the 'younger' age criminals be thought out. Can these young criminals be treated with help and be re evalutaed when they turn 21?

just wondering....

pk

pk · 11-24-2006, 03:09 AM

the situation that I am referring is whether the state should be able to sentence a child as an adult such as this case where it is a fight over a boy. Of maybe if two kids got in a fist fight and one was killed etc.

Not in a situation where a young child brings a gun to school and kills his teacher and many students after he thought it out and planned it.

Crys · 11-27-2006, 05:45 AM

In this case, yes. Generally, I think it depends on the circumstances. This was premeditated. She is old enough to know it was wrong and did it anyway because she thought there would be no consequences to her, and that it was ok that her mother might get into a lot of trouble over it.

Now, an accidental death in a spur-of-the-moment blowup between students, no, probably not. But this wasn't an accident, nor was it in-the-heat-of-the-moment.

Frankly, our extended notion of childhood as lasting into the twenties is a very recent development and while I'm all for giving kids the time to learn before throwing them to the wolves of job and rent and insurance, and protecting them from predatory adults (both sexual predators and businesses looking for cheap expendable labor), they reach an age of responsibility far earlier than we give them credit for. Kids like this don't grow up to be responsible adults. They grow up thinking there are no consequences for their behavior because we dismiss it as "youth". Anyone who would commit premeditated murder, intending the outcome to be death or life-long crippling in their victim, and understanding what that means, needs to be removed from society for the good of society. Permanently.

I recognize that our system is in many ways broken. We've gone from a court system that would rather let ten guilty people go free than incarcerate one innocent person, to a system that would rather jail ten innocent people for the sake of catching that one guilty person, just so people's thirst for revenge and blame can be slaked, no matter who it destroys in the process. And I think that needs to change. But it doesn't change that fact that people like that girl still need to be dealt with in a way that keeps her from hurting anyone else.

pk · 11-27-2006, 06:13 PM

Anyone interested in this topic please check out this website:

http://www.kidsincourt.com/

Crys · 11-28-2006, 04:59 AM

What I really see in that website is not that kids who are cognizant of their actions shouldn't be tried as adults. What I see is a problem with the system in general. I'm starting to think that no one should be questioned by the police at any time, for any reason, without a lawyer present. They should be required to stay within very strict guidelines for any kind of interrogation, whether of a suspect or just routine questioning, and all interrogations should always be on certified video with an independent witness, such as a court reporter.

The site also mentions that once a person is charged as an adult, their parents can no longer be involved with their defense. I don't know if that's a state-by-state thing, or what, but it shouldn't somehow magically release the system from all the other laws regarding minors. Parents and legal guardians should be involved at all times.

I kind of see this as part and parcel with other recent news stories involving police, like the 92-yr-old woman who was defending her home from burglars (I'm sure she thought) who didn't announce that they were actually police before they murdered her, or the man in New York who was riddled with 50 bullet holes for coming around a corner drunk. Ticket, revoked license, sure. Bullets??! The whole thing needs more transparency to the people, and then it needs to be taken apart and put back together one piece at a time, with no more rewards for confessions (true or not) and violence (warranted or not) and convictions (of the innocent or not) at any cost.

You know, come to think of it, this is why I voted against the death penalty. I'm actually FOR the death penalty in certain types of cases, if the system worked the way it's supposed to. But since it tends to be applied unequally and the innocent are often sent to death row due to police techniques like lying to get false, coerced confessions, I couldn't vote for it in any conscience.

I guess the difference here is that the girl in question obviously knew what she was doing and there's no question of whether or not she did it. It's not a matter of bad police tactics like the examples on the site. She thought she could literally get away with murder because she's a minor, and didn't care how much or what kind of trouble her mother got in for it. That has to stop one way or the other.

pk · 11-28-2006, 06:34 AM

Quote:

You know, come to think of it, this is why I voted against the death penalty. I'm actually FOR the death penalty in certain types of cases, if the system worked the way it's supposed to. But since it tends to be applied unequally and the innocent are often sent to death row due to police techniques like lying to get false, coerced confessions, I couldn't vote for it in any conscience.

Exactly what I thought when I was faced with the question and how to vote for it. The death penalty should be for extreme cases, but the way 'power' runs in many cases, I shutter to think how many times it could be used incorrectly. I could not vote for that.

Moosebreath · 05-07-2007, 11:55 PM

I see this everyday in Sheboygan. One day a 20 year old is a child, and the next he is a adult. Same as a 18 year old female: one day she is a child, the next she is an adult. They charge a 18 year old for rape, because his girlfriend who said they both agreed to sex, and she is 17. Kids are being charged for rape when there is a mutual consent. Same thing for soldiers. if he can fight for our country, he should be allowed to drink. I guess it's ok to kill people, you just can't consume alcohol yet!

**AJE** · 08-25-2007, 07:01 PM

YES, IF THEY ARE OLD ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND RIGHT FROM WRONG BY HELL THEY DESERVE TO BE CHARGED AS AN ADULT!

**AJE** · 08-25-2007, 10:44 PM

Teen sentenced for crash that killed Tongan royals, driver

REDWOOD CITY, California (AP) -- A teenage motorist convicted of causing a freeway collision that killed two members of Tonga's royal family and their driver has been sentenced to two years in county jail.

humm :arrow:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/25/ton....ap/index.html